About your Search

20130208
20130208
STATION
CNN 3
CNNW 3
MSNBC 3
MSNBCW 3
KNTV (NBC) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
KQED (PBS) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WMPT (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
sort of think they have an advantage. but what is getting cut? the pentagon is taking the brunt of these cuts. certainly the commander in chief doesn't want that to happen. a ton of democrats are quite fine with seeing pentagon spending cuts. so, you know, it's sort of like nobody really wants it to happen but both sides are sort of okay with it. >> to the point of who might have the upper hand, charles krauthammer wrote this. obama's bluff is being called and he's the desperate water. what should they do? nothing. cheryl, there are others who are saying that if this happens, at least we get those cuts. what's the feeling on capitol hill right now? >> well, i think there are some republicans who are fairly public about the fact that they do not want to see the seek questions sister cuts go through. a lot of these republicans represent the heavy military presence, a the lo lot of defen contractors in their area. generally ryan is right, they don't want to see the cuts go through but they are kind of preparing for it, that this is going to happen. they view the president's offer f
significant military capability. senator john mccain wrote the pentagon, calling it one of the most egregious examples of mismanagement in recent memory. >> $1 billion has been basically totally wasted, with nothing to show for it. >> reporter: just flushed down the drain. >> flushed down the drain. >> reporter: you know, a lot of americans remember that infamous $600 toilet set. is this even worse than that? >> i don't mean to make a joke, but at least they got a toilet seat. out of this, they got nothing. we got nothing. >> reporter: so what went wrong? >> you had a company that wasn't up to the task of managing the project. you had a computer system that wasn't actually able to do the job. and you had an air force that was asleep at the switch. >> reporter: a top executive for the lead contractor, computer science's corporation or csc, told nbc news that it provided the air force with capabilities and assets to deliver the system of the future, and that taxpayers got their money's worth. an air force official sees it differently. >> i'm personally appalled at the limited capabilities that
committee outgoing defense secretary leon panetta strongly defended the pentagon's response to the september 11 attack in benghazi that left chris stevenson and three others dead. panetta told lawmakers there just wasn't enough time to get attack aircraft to the scene. >>> today, president obama will speak at a farewell dinner for panetta. who will be replaced by chuck hagel if replaced by the senate. >>> and michelle obama plans to travel to chicago to attend the funeral for 15-year-old hadiya pendleton. an honor a student and band majorette who participated in the inauguration festivities. hadiya was the victim of gun violence last week. fatally shot about a mile from the obama home. no arrests have been made. >> now to our big story of the day, that potentially historic blizzard bearing down on the northeast. if jim cantore shows up in your town it's bad news. jim is live in boston this morning. jim, how bad will it be? >> reporter: going to be bad. i brought a yardstick with me. we're starting with nothing. nothing on the ground pap few patches. we're ready to measure this thing. a high
in syria. the plan was directed by david petraeus and backed by pentagon leaders and secretary of state hillary clinton. the white house had doubts which rebels could be trusted with the arms. those details came to light during a senate hearing on libya and republicans had some tough questions for panetta, who revealed he and president obama spoke once during the eight-hour benghazi attack that left four americans dead and explained why the pentagon didn't send any war planes. >> reporter: the reason planes were not launched the attack came in two waves in two different locations and after the first wave ended after about an hour and a half they all thought it was over plus he said there wasn't enough actionable intelligence on the ground to act. >> you can't just willy-nilly send f-16s there and blow the hell out of a place without knowing what's taking place. >> reporter: under questioning by republicans secretary panetta and the joint chiefs of staff martin dempsey say they were aware in the months before attack u.s. ambassador chris stevens was worried about s
it calls "non- lethal" assistance. and with panetta's departure from the pentagon today, plus clinton's last week and petraeus's resignation in 2012, general dempsey is the only known remaining advocate of arming the rebels still in a top advisory role. i'm joined who served in the obama administration state departments and is now dean of the school of advanced international studies at johns hopkins university. and andrew tabler, a senior fellow at the washington institute for near east policy. what were the main schools of thought. how did the camps break down in this argument inside the administration on what to do about syria, andrew? >> basically you have a discussion about syria about all the different options. and it really comes down to this. the white house was hedgingment they really did not want to get involved in syria. they have a firm policy to stay out of the middle east and would like to pull back. at the same time the agencies that deal with syria and the problem there, which is growing and mushrooming, the state department, cia and to a certain extent the department o
to overthrow the assad regime. the plan had received support from the pentagon, the cia, secretary clinton. but ultimately it was the white house that turned down the idea. >> both of you agreed with petraeus and clinton that we should start looking at military assistance in syria, is that correct? >> that was our position. i do want to say, senator, that obviously there were a number of factors that were reversed here that ultimately led to the president's decision to make it nonlethal. i supported his decision in the end. but the answer to your question is yes. >> for both of you? >> yes. >> "the wall street journal" says the white house was concerned about which rebels could be trusted with arms. was also worried about the risk of drawing the united states into another military conflict. but it was questions over benghazi that led to the most heated moments with secretary panetta and general dempsey defending the administration's response to the deadly raid on the u.s. consulate. >> for you to testify that our posture would not allow a rapid response, our posture was not there because w
military activity is that nobody in the pentagon would have ordered military act ship without a specific order from the president. and the president wasn't around. rick: i want do ask you both, we have about a minute and a half left. another story came out of these hearings. that is the president himself, rick, himself opposed a plan that was supported by pretty much everybody else in his administration, to try to arm the rebels in syria. what do you make of that? >> you know i think it's remarkable that his team was really recommending that we needed to do something to support what was happening there and identify the opposition, the right opposition and then try to give them some sort of military support. and the president said no. i think this goes back to exactly who he is and what he believes the inate, positive, good of people. i think he doesn't understand, the president doesn't understand, this is a dangerous world and that we need to take sides to make sure that the right people are the ones who take hold in syria. it is the same thing that happened in egypt. really the same thi
, of course, working on the force. andy lampry, thank you so much. i need to move to the pentagon as we're getting some news on this story in california. barbara starr, tell me what you're learning about servicemen and women being on alert now. >> absolutely brooke, resonating at the pentagon, this man was a former navy lieutenant in the naval reserves. and now we are told that u.s. navy bases in california and nevada are on, quote, maintaining a heightened security posture, a heightened state of alert as they too are on the lookout for this man. and they do have some reason to know that he has approached the u.s. military in the last few days. a couple of days ago, they learned -- they discovered that he had stayed at a navy motel facility in san diego, and on wednesday he approached two navy sailors at his old unit when he was in the reserves, had a conversation with them, they did not realize they had been talking to dorner until they saw all the news reports. so a lot of concern now, in fact, a day ago, the point loma naval base shut down briefly while they thought he might be there
good-bye for leon panetta. the pentagon sends the boss off with a formal ceremony happening today, even though he is likely to be on the job for at least another couple of weeks. panetta spoke yesterday before congress, said there will always an debate over how much military power to put around the world. >> united states military, as i've said, is not and frankly should not be a 911 service capable of arriving on the scene within minutes to every possible contingency around the world. u.s. military has neither the resources nor the responsibility to have a firehouse next to every u.s. facility in the world. >> former senator chuck hagel has been nominated to replace panetta. that confirmation vote continues and has been postponed. >>> a look at this massive crowd that filled the streets in tunisia. this was a public funeral of an opposition leader shot dead outside his home wednesday. thousands of grieving and angry folks marching with his coffin to a cemetery. many believe it was a political assassination. riot police have violently put down several public demonstrations since that sh
during the testimony, it was interesting because panetta said the pentagon, the c.i.a., and the department of state were all on board with sending the rebels in syria where there has been mass genocide because ofor us to send them arms. you know who said no? the white house. well, we don't know if it's going to work. we don't know which of the rebels to arm. ultimately we don't know if it will result in the ouster of assad. >> brian: the "washington post" lead editorial today says hillary clinton and david petraeus, running the c.i.a. identified the group that they believe would have been the preferrable group to take over through all the rebels, they weeded through and had a plan. and the president nixed it. the word is too political. they wanted to make it seem we're not on a war footing with the election a month away. >> gretchen: maybe the election playing a huge role. let's look at the fox news polls right now. recently conducted, how many people feel our country compared to five years ago? nearly half of those polled say america is weaker and less powerful to
the sequester in a hurry, then yes, it's a real problem because it doesn't let the pentagon begin to plan and distribute, if you will, the cuts. but at the end of the day, whether it's defense spending, education spending, health spending, what always matters more than how much you spend is how you spend it. and so i'm not, at the end of the day, all that worried about how much we spend, whether it's on defense or anything else. you just want to have the time to make some intelligent cuts rather than have to make them literally in a matter of days which would probably mean that readiness more than anything else would be cut out of the defense department account. and that's probably the one thing you don't want cut out of it. >> sam stein, you're close and yet so far away over there at the jump seat. what are the odds that the sequester actually takes place? we know the president's proposed something to push them back a while. are we going to see these kind of cuts, the ones that were outlined in the sequester proposal? >> i think the odds are pretty high, to be honest. i don't think there
to be furloughs at the pentagon, the pay increases for the troops will not be as large as he would like, and then the president today added on to them, said, look, this is going to affect seniors, food safety, the poor. so what they are setting themselves up for is really this argument they are set to have and i think we're going to hear from the state of the union, over these automatic spending cuts that are due to take effect. the president is saying, we cannot let this occur and he's ready to clearly have that fight with republicans on this. >> panetta leaving office with an extraordinary acknowledgement that the defense department, the cia, state department, all of them recommended to the president that the u.s. should start arming, directly arming syrian rebels but the president decided that was not necessarily a good idea. that's pretty extraordinary. >> it was extraordinary. he was asked about it at a congressional hearing. what is interesting to me is someone who covers washington, it's not that there is disagreement at certain points over policy between the secretary of defense
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)